Probably in attempt to balance the Subs to the bolt action rifles that you have to click Fire again after each shot to reload...which I think is pretty damn stupid.

That's not why it was done at all. They had a specific reason which they stated on the forums and in the manual, I believe.

The reason they have the bolt action rifles take the extra step is actually to help the riflemen, but you have to actually use cover for it to be of any use. (Gasp, how dare they expect you to play the game properly?) Most games require you to wait for the bolting animation before you can duck back behind cover. In RO you pop up from behind cover, fire, pop back behind your cover again, THEN bolt your rifle now that you're safe to do so.

It takes some getting used to, but it works very well once you are used to it. Personally I think they should have made it an option to automatically bolt or not, that way people won't keep whining about it.

Considering how beautifully the integrated auto-patching system works, I'd have to disagree with that. If I had to go find the patch and download it, I'd agree. This was one click of a button, wait 30 seconds, click ok and reload the demo.

Don't think they're doing an SP demo until later, if at all. They got a TON of flack last time for only releasing a SP demo and no MP demo. Either they had to make a decision of one or the other, or they overcompensated for all the bitching. Personally, I'd rather have the MP demo anyways, but that's me.

How about F.E.A.R. 2What a fucking concept.It's worked well for every other game of decent or better quality.Why not stick with it here?You need something poetic? Like... Remittance, or Rebirth? Maybe Redux, or Rehab?The first poster in this thread was right.. opening your title up like this basically says, "we don't care."

Because they don't own the rights to the name F.E.A.R. Vivendi Universal does and Vivendi is planning on doing their own sequel using a different studio than Monolith.

Monolith on the other hand, and their parent company (I believe it was Warner Brothers Interactive) own the rights to the FEAR universe and decided to make their own sequel, but they can't use the name without Vivendi's permission (ie: without paying them a boatload for it).

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Videogames are not passive entertainment. You have to interact with them and therefore, you have to think. Except with Diablo. Being fun is simply the minimum requirement for any game. They have to be more than just fun. They have to have depth and longevity. That's what separates the great from the decent.

Bullshit. I still enjoy playing tetris and Bejewelled and other games that companies like popcap makes. They don't have depth or longevity, and they really don't require you to think beyond the most basic methods to play the game.

It's pretty obvious that you know absolutely jack shit about games. Thank god you don't make them for a living, or you'd be stone broke.

As for Diablo's critical success and popularity... since when have those ever been a reliable measure of quality? The Sims has both critical and popular success. Halo has both. CS too. Does that make them good games? Hardly.

No, the level of polish on all of the above listed games, the balance formula that keeps them competitive and interesting and the gameplay that the majority of gamers seem to enjoy make them good games.

The fact that you don't like them doesn't make them bad. Get over yourself.

I've seen a ton of episodes but years ago. Very VERY weird. Strange universe created in it. Very low production quality, not a lot of money behind it I imagine. It's interesting, dark and very bizarre theme with quirky humour.

Not on the top of my lists, but I'd rather watch Lexx than most of (if not all) the Star Treks, if that says anything.

Good. I'm glad that they listened to fans and decided to do something other than WW2. Considering there's no popular, top tier modern warfare infantry game out there now, this is a good move for them. Vegas fizzled out and so did GRAW because of the same reasons, GRAW 2 is looking to have the exact same issues.

While I've never been a big fan of the CoD series, CoD4 might just be my game of choice for the next while, until Blackfoot is done what they're working on.

It's pretty obvious from Joss' posts that he's never played an X-com game to begin with, especially considering he's comparing it to Gauntlet. Why are you even posting about a game-type that you know nothing of, Joss? The last thing we need around here are more ignorant opinions.

There was a hell of a lot more difference between GRAW PC and GRAW 360 than just bigger maps.

As stated, the "planning" map on the PC version was a realtime overview of the area. The PC version was 1st person as opposed to 3rd person. The PC version had the ability to hand out individual orders to each squad member and have them execute on command, whereas the 360 version required you to order your entire squad to perform a command.

That said, the PC version released with less maps and WAY WAY WAYYYYY less server options than the 360 version and was generally more clunky and cumbersome when playing. They had some good ideas, but ultimately failed to hit the mark. They also released with NO stand alone dedicated server package and no functional anti-cheat, and one HELL of a lot of bugs from crashes to disconnection problems, and a total of 5 MP maps. Yes, five maps with only ONE adversarial game mode and one cooperative mode that was gimped from the get-go by ending the game whenever the person playing Captain Mitchell died.

All the failures of GRAW PC compared to GRAW 360 were EXACTLY what prompted many people to flat out request that GRAW 2 be a port. Yes, people actually asked for that. Lots of people.

Time will tell how GRAW 2 fares on PC, but after Lockdown, GRAW and Vegas, UBI can be damned sure they won't get a cent of my money unless it happens to be spectacular, stable AND complete with SADS and anti-cheat. At this point, I'm not even interested in the beta. That's how disappointed I am with the way GRAW and Vegas played out.

Yes, it has it's quirks. Had a nasty habit of crashing in MP, but that's all but been resolved with the second patch. I've not crashed since and I used to ever 10 minutes or so. I've still heard of a couple people crashing, and the game does NOT like Norton's Firewall, or McAfee's. At least it has good taste.

There's a couple little ones now, but none that are gamebreaking if you ask me. The biggest problems are, in order:

1) System requirements, if you don't have an SM3.0 capable video card already.2) No SADS files yet, but they are on the verge of being released.3) Punkbuster isn't working properly yet, no access to it's commandsand4) No map editor. No word on whether or not we'll see one, but there's hope.